[object Object]

The whole point of going after kids is:

• hook them young so they never form other habits
• make them weaker (stupider, poorer, less healthy) so they can’t defend themselves and have to buy your shit

Facebook bought Instagram because it was more popular with young people over grandma got on Facebook.

Most companies don’t have the skill for that.

Meta yes, but most other companies no.

I dumped my phone company over their AI answering system.

It was totally broken:

• you can’t know when the AI is lying or will do something it says it will for you
• it’s not designed to be helpful, it’s designed to keep you away from humans
• this particular system required you to say a correct and available time you want a callback, and if you were incorrect it would hang up on you.

I’ll bet the cost metrics looked great, 100% of calls being handled without a callback! Oh, the customers leaving is unrelated, talk to the retention department.

Just utter fucking stupidity. No, not stupidity, complete disregard for the customer to serve some department heads self interests. There needs to be a word stronger than greed…

I do not want to work with such people, and rite incompetence is something any organization should try to combat.

But forcing period to use AI tools will only mask this problem.

Teach him ctrl+r, life changing when you plug out into fzf

I cannot for the life of me understand AI mandates.

Who doesn’t want to be able to get their work done easier? Nobody.

Then it follows you shouldn’t have to tell your employees to use a tool if it makes them however much as productive as CEOs think that tech demo should make them.

I think it’s pretty obvious that at the exec level AI is the ultimate hoodwinking machine. It’s made 90% of them look like the out of touch morons they are. The 10% or whatever that aren’t trying to force this down their staff’s throats in the hopes they can replace said staff are coming out smelling like roses.

Don’t fit a square peg in a round hole.

My idempotent claim was too broad and wrong, up to aliasing that is reversible.

I think I’ve been talking about this differently than you, when you get 8bit into, 255 in/out is correct.

When generating data I do it in the natural [0,1] space, then map to whatever domain I’m quantizing for.

In that case, for N bins you divide by N+1 (and round however you want via correction) so 256. I was probably wrong earlier around this, 256 is correct for quantizing that way.

Yes, so not dremel the battery

But if your car has an arbitrary plastic divider that blocks you from using a two pack you can probably dremel that without issue

Not all AA cases fit the same, but that’s why god gave us the imagination to invent the dremel tool.

If you’re generating random numbers you apply the correction to your random numbers: [0, 1) is a bin for zero, and [255,256) maps to 255. If you are sampling as such, you are responsible for applying the correction as part of your quantization.

256 never comes up, because it cannot in the 8bit quantization.

The correct way to scale a number from one range to another is ((value - min) / (max - min)) * output_range + output_min and in this way the standard colour normalization should be (value - 0)/(255 - 0) * 1 + 0 = value / 255

Now the question becomes whether an 8bit pixel value is a correct representation of a colour, or should it quantize to a half value. To answer this, I aggressively point to the above equation. It is fine. There are 256 well considered values, and any system with higher resolutions/precision should also map from 0 to 1 per channel.

It should be obvious to the reader that 0.5/256 is not zero, and therefore not black. The 256 method is also not idempotent, applying it once destructively alters the data.

And the argument that 256 has higher resolution: so would 354256, but there’s no sensible place that matters.

To train their AI on and now that they’ve got the goods they’ve kicked Reddit to the curb

Are you talking about NixOS?

You can install post user nix home manager distributions which are separate from the shared nix environment (not sure if that’s the right term)

I suspect getting the dates wrong is because websites ump their publish date when nothing has changed, which keeps them showing up in results for extended/indefinite periods.

Obviously Google should police that, but Google doesn’t use Google news I don’t think.

They had a really really really hard choice though

Be “behind” on AI with the shareholders, or drop expenses and pretend using ChatGPT/Claude makes them unique for the shareholders!

Isn’t that what this does? You do a bunch of small PRs then stack them into the full feature

I think there’s some widespread regret about AI not being good enough to replace your whole dev team with one new grad project manager who just clicks yes on 100 Claude code sessions.

Duopoly is as duopoly does.

These companies are fucking pathetic with this.

No, you can’t defend yourself from US AI using US AI, but also, nobody else is allowed to make AI, it’s too dangerous!

Fuck off.

Your off brand TV stick was always a bot farm.